Knowing what I know about politics, I realize that for any politician it is hard to take the unpopular stance on any issue. Cries from the left and even from the moderate right against our war in Iraq will make it difficult for our President to take further military action, even if it is warranted.The Drudge Report reported today that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad declared that Iran must prepare for the return of the Islamic messiah.

The article that the Drudge Report references states that Ahmadinejad has “another dimension, a religious messianism that, some suspect, is giving the Iranian leader a dangerous sense of divine mission.”

The article continues by saying “the most remarkable aspect of Mr. Ahmadinejad’s piety is his devotion to the Hidden Imam, the Messiah-like figure of Shia Islam, and the president’s belief that his government must prepare the country for his return…All streams of Islam believe in a divine saviour, known as the Mahdi, who will appear at the End of Days…[The Mahdi] is said to have gone into “occlusion” in the ninth century, at the age of five. His return will be preceded by cosmic chaos, war and bloodshed. After a cataclysmic confrontation with evil and darkness, the Mahdi will lead the world to an era of universal peace…This is similar to the Christian vision of the Apocalypse. Indeed, the Hidden Imam is expected to return in the company of Jesus…Mr. Ahmadinejad appears to believe that these events are close at hand and that ordinary mortals can influence the divine timetable.”

To be honest, I think we can handle the cosmic chaos – it’s that whole war and bloodshed part that gets me. Is the United States prepared for another war? Do we have the troop strength, and do we have enough public support backing military force? Like I said earlier, it’s difficult for any politician to make a politically unpopular move, especially when lives are on the line.

It’s no surprise that Iran is expanding their nuclear research, and may already be developing a nuclear weapon. This is not a good thing for the West, especially the United States. We’ve seen what Islamic extremists are willing to do to destroy our way of life.

I hope the President realizes the severity of a lack of action with Iran’s potential nuclear capability. Don’t get me wrong. I’m not criticizing the President for not acting with force yet. I’m sure he knows much better than I do about the current situation. I only fear that all the negative press the current war in Iraq is getting could make the President feel paralyzed and not use force when it is needed.

• Criminal Prosecution of Self-Defense With Hillary Clinton's sights on the White House in 2008...
• Where do They Stand on the Issues? Many of you out there may be confused about where...

• Michael Steele: Please, Please, Please Resign Michael Steele started his run as the Chairman of the...
• USA Manages to Capture 24th PGA Cup Win Managing to solve Scotland for the first time, the USA...

John Murtha said on ABC’s Nightline that the war in Iraq was the wrong war for President Bush to launch. Murtha, a Vietnam veteran with the Marine Corps, was asked “Would you join (the military) today?” To which he replied “No”. The interviewer continued with “And I think you’re saying the average guy out there who’s considering recruitment is justified in saying ‘I don’t want to serve’.” “Exactly right,” said Murtha.I’ve got news for you, Murtha is exactly right in one respect. The average guy does exactly what he said – they consider recruitment. The people who volunteered to enlist in the military today are not average. They are extraordinary men and women who sacrifice so much so that we could be free.

• Convincing Promises, or Worthless Babble John Kerry, throughout his campaign has complained how George W....
• Cindy Sheehan: Go Home! Cindy Sheehan lost her son in Iraq. Naturally I feel...

• Please Call Us Women, Not Girls (In observation of Women's History Month and today, March 8,...
• MTV'S I Used To Be Fat, Episode 1, Gabriella The show is about overweight teens who have graduated from...

Note: The following article was originally posted by Todd Manzi on Townhall.com. Copyright © 2005 Townhall.com.The position of Democrats seems to be that it is easier to hunt down and kill terrorists than it is to make a living flipping burgers. Democrats are telling us we should withdraw from Iraq, so that the Iraqis will have an incentive to stand up and fight for themselves. When it comes to the War on Poverty, however, Democrats want the federal government to continue assisting the needy indefinitely.

Which is easier, learning how to fight terrorists in Iraq or finding a way to make a living in the United States? Our steady stream of immigrants would indicate the latter, but the rhetoric of Democrats points to the former.

Perhaps it’s time to help the Democrats understand the challenge we face regarding the security of Iraq. Using a football analogy might be helpful.

Let’s say the U.S. military is like the best NFL team to ever take the field. The terrorists might be like the worst junior college team. The Iraqis who are joining the military are men who have never played football. If you just toss them the ball and tell them to go play football, they will get slaughtered. Literally.

Individually, the Iraqis need to be trained how to fight. Then they need to be trained how to fight as a team. Then they need leadership to direct them so they can properly execute big picture strategies. But that’s not enough. The trainers have to be trained so that Iraq can have a self-sufficient military.

If all the best minds in the NFL were brought together, how long would it take them to teach others how to train, field and coach a team that could compete against an already functioning junior college team?

Of course, it’s silly to compare war to football. Lives are on the line in Iraq and this is not a game. But it does serve as a reminder that our mission in Iraq is to stand by the brave men who are coming forward and putting their lives on the line to defend their country. The U.S. military provides the stability that gives Iraqi men the confidence needed to commit to the cause.

Democrats are doing their best to undermine that confidence.

They are sending the message to Iraqi men that they may lose the safety provided by our soldiers. Those who advocate immediate withdrawal are making the enormously difficult job in Iraq much harder than it already is.

Here at home, Democrats send an entirely different message to welfare recipients. The message to this group is that the federal government will stand beside them indefinitely.

For these people, Democrats want to provide unlimited support, programs and financial aid. We have a bloated bureaucracy tasked with providing unending handouts.

It is time to admit the war on poverty is a quagmire and the federal government should withdraw. The Constitution never authorized us to enter this war in the first place. Let’s send a strong message to the individual states: we are going to cut and run from the war on poverty. There is no need to point fingers about who lied us into this war. We don’t have to highlight the numerous mistakes that were made. Nor do we have to identify who benefited themselves by getting elected to office under the cover of fighting poverty. All we need to do is assess the situation and act accordingly.

Does anyone want to defend the progress or accomplishments we have made with our efforts fighting the war on poverty? Anyone?

To be fair to Democrats, let’s accurately assess the situation in Iraq and act accordingly. Four years and three months ago, the United States was attacked, and the global War on Terror began. President Bush did not bow to the pressure he was under to initiate a quick response. He acted thoughtfully, patiently and unbelievably competently.

Our first attack in the War on Terror was to cut off much of their financing. Then we took control of Afghanistan. Next, we debated whether President Bush had the authority to invade Iraq. The president asked Congress to provide the authority and they did. Then we debated whether we should go to war in Iraq or not. President Bush even took the time to go back to the U.N. to get another resolution supporting the invasion of Iraq. After all that, we still waited and gave the dictator one last chance to avoid war. That was the first year and a half of our War on Terror.

Next, we defeated the Iraqi army and took control of the country. We hunted down the tyrant and pulled him from his rat hole. We handed over sovereignty of the country to the Iraqi people. We provided stability as they had elections and ratified a constitution. Now, we are training Iraqis in how to train themselves to do the job of keeping their own country safe from future terrorist threats.

Wow.

We have accomplished a lot in a short period. The War on Terror has been much more successful than the war on poverty, but both of these wars should end as soon as possible. How about if we compromise with the Democrats? As we draw down our troop levels in Iraq, we will also reduce the size of our federal welfare bureaucracy. On the day we are completely out of Iraq, we will also completely eliminate all federal welfare.

Democrats have proposed the theory that a group of people will not become independent and self-sufficient if they can rely on support from the U.S. government. We should test that theory here at home to see if Democrats might be right.

• Cindy Sheehan: Go Home! Cindy Sheehan lost her son in Iraq. Naturally I feel...
• Anti-War Cries Will Hurt us in the Long Run Knowing what I know about politics, I realize that for...

• Golf Preview: 2009 President's Cup The 2009 President's Cup is kicking off on Thursday, and...
• Detroit Bomber 'Singing Like a Canary' Before Arrest Sunday Paper - January 10th, 2010 President Barack Obama is...

In an interview with Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation, Sen. Kerry was asked the following about the war in Iraq:
“Democrat Senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut, he takes a very different view, Senator Kerry. He says basically that we should stay the course, because he says real progress is being made. He says, ‘This is a war between 27 million Iraqis who want freedom and 10,000 terrorists.’ He says we’re in a watershed transformation. What about that?”To which Kerry responded:
I don’t agree with that. But I think what we need to do is recognize what we all agree on, which is, you’ve got to begin to set benchmarks for accomplishment; you’ve got to begin to transfer authority to the Iraqis, and there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the – of – of – of – historical customs, religious customs, whether you like it or not. Iraqis should be doing that.

So it seems like Sen. Kerry has a problem with Americans “terrorizing” Iraqis, but not with Iraqis “terrorizing” Iraqis. This doesn’t surprise me much though. Remember back to Vietnam-era Kerry, who testified before Congress on “war crimes” committed by American troops. This most recent comment is just Kerry being Kerry, showing his true colors.

The problem with Sen. Kerry’s argument is that we’re not “terrorizing” Iraqis by barging into their houses. We’re fighting a war. The terrorists have decided to hide among the population, therefore we need to go into where the population lives and weed them out. The only people we are terrorizing are the terrorists. Hopefully the Iraqi people will never have to terrorize the terrorists on their own. Hopefully we will leave them with a peaceful country where the terrorists realize their tactics don’t work, and the Iraqi defense is strong enough to keep terrorists out.

That’s my “benchmark for accomplishment” Sen. Kerry. Unlike you, I want to accomplish something more than just troop withdrawal.

• Supreme Court Takeover President Obama will be faced with appointing someone to the...
• John Kerry Supports Mandatory Service in the Military The best thing about the internet is it allows the...

• Buy Collectibles from the Civil War If you are interested in learning what it takes to...
• GM Sends A Cool Billion to Brazil but Reminds Us to Buy American! I've been fairly quiet about the Big Three Auto Bailout...

Cindy Sheehan lost her son in Iraq. Naturally I feel as sympathetic for her as I do for the over 1,800 other parents who’ve lost a son or daughter in Iraq. If it is a typical thing that the President meets with parents of fallen soldiers, I would expect that he would do the same with her as well. As it turns out he does do this on a relatively frequent basis, including a meeting with Cindy Sheehan shortly after her son was killed.After meeting with the President, Cindy was quoted by a California newspaper as saying,
“I now know [President Bush] is sincere about wanting freedom for the Iraqis. I know he’s sorry and feels some pain for our loss.”

So why is she still standing out there with her comrades wanting another visit with the President? Like I said before, I’m sympathetic towards everyone who loses a relative in war, but it doesn’t give you a direct line to the President to go and chat whenever you want. You can’t just walk up to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave in D.C. or Crawford, TX and expect to be able to have free access to the place. He’s a busy guy, despite all the nonsense the left is saying about the President’s long vacation. He still gets briefed everyday; he still has important decisions to make, including ones that can help make sure more of our boys come home safely from Iraq. But if Cindy Sheehan would rather chat with W while he could be making a decision that could save the lives of other soldiers, why shouldn’t she have that right?

Grow up Mrs. Sheehan. You had your chance to talk to the President and the fact that you’ve changed your mind about the war and the President is your problem. You’re entitled to your opinion – I would never deny that fact – but to think that since your son was killed you are all of a sudden a foreign policy and military expert is absurd. The President has many good men working for him to make sure our country, and our interests overseas are protected. He doesn’t need your two cents as well.

President Bush didn’t want Casey Sheehan or any other soldier to come home the way they did, but there’s a reality to war. It’s not pretty and bad things happen to good, brave people. I’m sure Casey was one of these people who loved the country he fought for. But Mrs. Sheehan, leave the President alone. He won’t forget that you were there, or the message you were trying to get across – I know his neighbors won’t let him! Besides, he’s got his hands full already making sure another hero doesn’t have to come home the way your son did.

• Criminal Prosecution of Self-Defense With Hillary Clinton's sights on the White House in 2008...
• Post Election Whining It's been a week since the election, and we're already...

• What Does Your Home’s Curb Appeal Say? Whether you are selling your home, or you just want...
• What You Need to Know about Civil War Old Coins Old coins from the Civil War are highly valued and...

Three years ago today, our country was under attack. The attack came from unconventional enemies, attacking us using unconventional means. The attack caught us by surprise, but otherwise normal people jumped into action to respond to the attack. Brave firefighters and police officers raced into the burning buildings, knowing very well that they may never come back out. They willingly risked their lives, so that others may live. These men and women are true heroes, in every sense of the word.Three years ago, names like Osama bin Laden and Al-Qa’ida were not household names. While we may have heard of them before, they were hardly newsworthy at the time.

Three years ago, box cutters weren’t thought of as a weapon that can kill thousands. Today, however, toe nail clippers are confiscated before boarding a plane.

Before 9/11/01, the American people felt a relative sense of security, since there hasn’t been a massive attack of this magnitude on the mainland of this country in any of our lifetimes. Today people still think twice about getting on a plane.

Until just recently, many of our national landmarks, such as the Statue of Liberty were closed to the public. They were deemed to be likely terror targets. Today you can visit these landmarks, but only under a watchful eye.

Three years ago we were still waiting to see what our new President was made of. Only a matter of months into his term, he was given the opportunity to show us just how great of a leader he can be. He declared a war on anyone who harbored terrorists, and made it clear that as long as he was the President, he would do everything in his power to prevent another attack.

Three years ago ordinary people put their lives on hold to serve their country. Today our brave soldiers are defending our country on foreign soil, so that the fight doesn’t have to come back home.

Three years ago thousands of people lost their lives. While we may have cleaned up the wreckage and began rebuilding, we can never forget what once stood on the lower end of Manhattan. We can never forget that day.

• Learn From Your Dog Have you ever seen a dog's reaction when it feels...
• Another Kerry "Flip Flop" A few days ago, John Kerry announced his stance on...

• How Much is Too Much to Spend on a Hobby?   I am not sure if it is sad or...
• Lazy Man's Gift Guide 2008 Last year at this time, I released my 15 products...